It takes strength for that. Perhaps the difference in thinking is akin to my choice in this area; many people find a lack of empirical evidence and decide to be atheist. I see the same lack of empirical evidence and decide to be agnostic.

For some they’re interchangable. For me, it’s not.

To me, the lack is rather like a possibility. It remains-to-be-seen. I don’t need proofs because I’m not looking to believe or not believe. I simply don’t know either way, and I’m ok in the “I don’t know” state because I have other more humanistic things to attend to than beliefs in this matter.

For some, the lack is evidence means one can shift to “God does not exist”. They’re atheist. I’m cool with that, as long as it doesn’t become anti-theism, which then leads to wars with words… and wars with words often lead (eventually) to war with swords, as it were. Enough time, enough power, it’s possible. Lack of political clout I think keeps that from happening just _yet_.

But to me, going from a “don’t know” / “not enough evidence to support” is like going from 0.00001% to 0. A rounding error.

I look at myself. I could easily be rounded out of existence statistically. But I’m still here smile emoticon

I can’t speak for anything else that might be roundable out of existence, or logically proven out of existence. I simply don’t know, although I learn more heavily towards “likely not” yet the lack of empirical evidence compels me to just leave the I don’t know an I don’t know.